....... wrote: » This post has been deleted.
volchitsa wrote: » Except it's not, it's closer to the norm in most of Europe than the British 24 week/access controlled law is. And what is really radical is a ban that requires a woman to be at risk of death before abortion is allowed. You also seem to be contradicting yourself. You said it was more radical than British law, but that if it passed, Ireland would inevitably move towrds the British form all the same. Looks like a clear case of having your scaremongering cake and eating it, to me.
volchitsa wrote: » And what is really radical is a ban that requires a woman to be at risk of death before abortion is allowed.
volchitsa wrote: » You also seem to be contradicting yourself. You said it was more radical than British law, but that if it passed, Ireland would inevitably move towrds the British form all the same.
volchitsa wrote: » Looks like a clear case of having your scaremongering cake and eating it, to me.
end of the road wrote: » the pro-life don't do scaremongering
volchitsa wrote: » As a woman, I find it quite offensive to be told that I am being melodramatic for stating the reality of the situation : my health is explicitly dismissed as a reason for medical treatment, and only a substantial risk to my life is worth acting on. And I'm being "melodramatic" for thinking that isn't really good enough?
....... wrote: » It IS offensive. Its very much a consequence of a woman being viewed as a second class citizen.
end of the road wrote: » at risk, meaning any risk of death and she can have an abortion in ireland. it's a good law as abortion should only be availible where medically necessary. outside that, no abortion, put the child up for adoption once born.
Delirium wrote: » That's every pregnancy.
I was born with a genetic, chronic, incurable condition called Ehlers Danlos Syndrome. It means that my collagen is faulty. Because collagen plays a role in every part of the body I have hundreds of symptoms. These include dislocations at any time, a fainting disorder, a gastrointestinal disorder and cardiac issues. I could continue listing my symptoms but I’d be here all day. Basically, there isn’t a day that doesn’t go by where I am not in constant pain or experiencing some other awful symptom. I’d be lucky to leave the house twice a week. From five weeks into my second pregnancy, I was wheelchair bound because every day my pelvis would dislocate. The next 33 weeks were hell. Then, at 38 weeks I was induced due to my waters leaking. After several hours I delivered my beautiful baby girl. I was so relieved the pregnancy was over. Then everything started to go black. In and out of consciousness, unable to hold my baby girl, I was haemorrhaging, common in women with my condition. Luckily, just as the midwives called for blood bags, the bleeding slowed. The pregnancy didn’t stop the pelvis from dislocating as we had hoped. I continue to have to use my wheelchair if I am out of the house for an extended period of time. If I am not using my chair, I am using my cane or crutches. If I get pregnant again, I won’t get out of that wheelchair. I could die. Like over half of the people who have travelled for abortion, I am using contraception. But, we all know contraception isn’t 100% effective. We also know how difficult it is to get a tubal ligation in this country and even if I found a doctor to look passed my age and small family, I couldn’t have one because any surgery could potentially kill me or leave me in a worse of state than I already am. Let’s say I do get pregnant tomorrow. What will I do? Well, we would have to save €2,000 for an abortion and as me and my husband depend on the state to survive, it would take weeks, possibly months to come up with €2,000 to travel. That's the difference between having a medical abortion and a surgical abortion. Surgical abortion could kill me or disable me further. I was asked recently would I take the abortion pill at home illegally. I answered yes. I would rather risk a 14 year prison sentence than potential death. At least my children can see me in prison and not have to visit a graveyard. I know I have a select few family and friends who would help us out if we told them but, what about those of us who don’t have a support network? What would I do if I wasn’t married or had a supportive partner? Because guess what, like others, disabled people also have sex for fun and outside the bonds of commitment! Like the 12 women who travel daily, my healthcare is also exported. Travelling for tests is exhausting, causes a flare up of all my symptoms and leaves me in bed for days and days. Sometimes my condition progresses after travel and stress. I couldn't imagine how bad off I'd be if I'd have to travel for a procedure, have to travel back the same day and recover from something like an abortion. I wouldn't be out of bed for weeks. My children wouldn't have their mother to play with. With the risk of complications and even death in any surgery I may have, having to leave before I had time to recover some bit for the flight home could leave my kids motherless. Like all the rest of my medical care, abortion needs to be accessible in my own country. There is no continuity of care when you travel for abortion. There is no contact between a patient's medical team in Ireland and the team carrying out the abortion in the UK. Which means the gynaecologist/OBGYN may not have all the information they need to properly care for their patient. Since there are thousands of disabilities and even more symptoms and complications that can arise, it would be hard to know of what to be cautious of. Medical history is very important, especially when it comes to surgery. For example, people with Ehlers Danlos Syndrome metabolise drugs differently to the average person. The issues go on and complications are not exclusive to Ehlers Danlos Syndrome. So, by the time a person has gathered the funds and have organised a trip out of the country to procure an abortion, they may have passed the point where they can have an abortion through the use of the pill, mifepristone. They will then instead have to undergo a surgical abortion. Without a knowledge and background from a patient's multidisciplinary team, things can get dangerous. However, should abortion be allowed in Ireland, teams could communicate and put safeguards into place to prevent any risks to my health and life. I have an almost three-year-old daughter. She inherited EDS from me. By age two she has suffered four dislocations. When puberty begins, her condition will worsen. Like me, she'll be high risk if she was to ever get pregnant. At such a young age she is already showing signs that her condition will be worse than what I have experienced. I worry what a pregnancy would do to her. Whatever she decides, I will support but I want her to at least have the right to make an informed decision. I want her to be able to talk about her decision should she choose abortion. I don't want her to feel ashamed and to feel as though she is doing something wrong. Nobody has an abortion on a whim or without thought. Nobody puts themselves through something like that for a laugh.
volchitsa wrote: » But in fact your version is untrue, it's not "any threat to her life at all" it has to be "a real and substantial risk" to her life. Not a potential risk to her life, and not a small risk to her life.
volchitsa wrote: » That was part of the hospital's defence in the investigation into Savita Hallapanavar, IIRC, that she had to be at over 50% risk of death, and since there is no way of measuring the change from 49% to 51%, they were not at obvious fault for having missed that.
Delirium wrote: » Saw this posted on Disabled People for Choice facebook page earlier today.
recedite wrote: » Those words mean a genuine risk, not a large risk. A small risk would suffice if it was genuine. A potential risk is not an actual risk, so that would not suffice. Whatever fanciful nonsense their lawyers came up with in their "defence" is irrelevant, because in the end they admitted malpractice or negligence and paid out an undisclosed compensation sum to the husband.
end of the road wrote: » i'm sorry for this lady but i think the existing law could be extended to cases like her without having abortion on demand, and that is what should happen.
i would also have to disagree with her about abortion not being wrong and something one shouldn't be ashamed of.
Delirium wrote: » How? She basically wants abortion on request, i.e. the possibility to take an abortion pill early in the pregnancy without having to wait until the pregnancy develops to endanger her life.
Delirium wrote: » Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, but why should she feel ashamed of having an abortion? Seems quite callous to say that she should. The woman would probably die if she gets pregnant and can't afford to travel to England.
end of the road wrote: » if it's woman shaming for suggesting someone who has an abortion on demand is supposed to be ashamed, then it's woman shaming when we suggest that a woman who killed a new born is supposed to be ashamed. if we are to follow your conclusion through, the judges in cases where people have killed their children are involved in man and woman shaming when they mention how someone hasn't showed remorse for their actions in the cases where no remorse was shown. so not only am i not guilty of woman shaming, but we can safely say your suggestion of woman shaming is nonsense. you could argue it but you wouldn't be correct. she would only be able to have the abortion in cases of medical necessity just like anyone else would only be able to have an abortion in a case of medical necessity, so no discrimination.
david75 wrote: » You are woman shaming though. Blatantly. Why even deny it it’s right there in your posts? It’s disruptive to the dialogue and really self destructive of the rest of your points you’re trying to make.
volchitsa wrote: » You are confusing punishing someone for committing a crime with allowing someone to do something but wanting them to feel ashamed for having done it. Do you really think someone who killed a 2-week-old baby should just be told to feel ashamed of themselves? Shouldn't there be an investigation and possibly a trial?
